ZEISS Adds 50mm Objective Scopes to TERRA 3X line


Zeiss, known for their high end scopes is launching a new line of 50mm objective scopes.  While I know that many are getting tired of objective lenses getting bigger, the 50mm tends to be a good compromise for hunters and shooters.  It give enough light gathering to see in low light situations, or even at night with lights but isn’t so big that it is ridiculous. With a retail price of just $349, these scopes are sure to make a splash with shooters and sportsman alike for good high end glass at an affordable price.

See the Zeiss press release for further information.

NORTH CHESTERFIELD, VA. – Carl Zeiss Sports Optics, the world’s leading manufacturer of high performance sports optics, is expanding its award-winning TERRA 3X riflescope line with four 50mm low-light models: the 3-9×50 Z-PLEX, the 3-9×50 RZ6, the 4-12×50 Z-PLEX and the 4-12×50 RZ8.

ZEISS TERRA 3X riflescopes outperform many other well-known brands by featuring best-in-class image quality, comfortable ergonomics and durable construction. With a retail price starting at just $349, these riflescopes pack a powerful, uncompromising punch into a lightweight, yet extremely rugged, compact one-inch design.

All TERRA 3X feature proprietary ZEISS MC anti-reflective coatings and 1/4-MOA adjustments. Based on its high performance and value, TERRA 3X riflescopes received Petersen’s Hunting magazine’s 2014 Editor’s Choice Award.

Building on this success, the new TERRA 3X models add even more versatility to this line of riflescopes: Featuring a larger 50mm objective, these four new riflescopes are perfect for low light conditions and offering hunters an opportunity to extend their day of shootable light.

“With the tremendous success that the TERRA line has experienced,” said Mike Jensen, President of Carl Zeiss Sports Optics, “it made perfect sense to expand this line with more high-performance models at incredibly competitive price points. We are excited to now offer 50mm low light performance riflescopes within reach of almost every sportsmen.”

The new riflescopes come standard with Z-PLEX or the TERRA-exclusive RZ6 and RZ8 ballistic reticles and are backed by ZEISS’ U.S. Limited Lifetime Warranty. For more information visit www.zeiss.com/sports.


  • iksnilol

    If only these high end scopes could be had with the SVD reticle.

    *shakes fist*

    • Steve Truffer

      Man, an PSO-1-1 reticle with a 1m rangefinder would kick ass.

      • iksnilol

        Aren’t 1m ones harder to use?

        I like the 1.75m rangefinder, it is easy to use and you can always add one 7th to the distance for crouched targets and animals like deer or moose (which are usualy 1.5m).

        • Steve Truffer

          .5m rangefinders are tricky, but I believe 1 m should cover both hog and the body of smaller deer.

          • iksnilol

            I suggested a 1.75m rangefinder (1.75 is average human height, 1.5 is usual height for large deer like moose). If you target large deer (like we do in Norway) just add one 7th to the distance (if you measure 200 meters with 1.75 rangefinder just add 30 meters which is about one 7th of 200 meters).

          • Steve Truffer

            Here in southeast USA, deer usually don’t weigh more than 150 lbs (bit less than 70 Kg). And feral hogs (mix between american pig & eurasian boar) are a concern as well. You get the big stuff, ours is lower down.

          • iksnilol

            Smaller (read: less dangerous) animals you can just sneak up on.

            Regarding the rangefinder you could probably use a 1.75 and add three 7ths to the distance. Example:

            You measure a deer and it says 200 meters with the 1.75 rangefinder, which would mean it would be 290 (round up to 300) if the object is 1 meter instead of 1.75 meter.

            I think/hope my math is correct.

          • Steve Truffer

            Thanks for the math, But, hogs are considered overpopulated, destructive, and aggressive. Less dangerous they are not.

          • iksnilol

            True that, I was referring to deer. Where I am from (Bosnia) there aren’t many wild hogs. So they usually are hunted with traditional hunting rifles (+ the sawn offs and AKs).

          • Steve Truffer

            Lucky. They’ve done so much damage here, they’ve caused a noticeable increase in grocery prices. Places are shutting down, and even if the hog problem went away today, some are so deep in it that tomorrow they wouldn’t have the money or credit to plow over & reseed.

          • iksnilol

            How organized are the exterminators? I know it isn’t realistic to kill them all, but a large number of well organized people with decent equipment (think local or state millitias) could damage their population something fierce. As long as they got together.

          • Steve Truffer

            No dedicated exterminators, but hunters go for them, there are depredation companies, and most affected states have declared them to be destructive species (can take them any time, any day, with anything except explosives). The problem is the startling intelligence and the reproductive rate ( 1 sow can produce upwards of 70 surviving offspring a year and its normal). Check Thetruthaboutguns.com, there are groups that “hunt” them from helicopters. For being so populous, they are hard to find, harder to kill, and a state can mark 5000 killed, and there is no appreciable effect on the population.

  • Peyton Besand

    The 50mm objective lenses on 1 inch tubes (these are 1 inch tube riflescopes?) are worthless though! All the light that a 1 inch tube can handle is able to be gathered by a 42mm objective lens. If you really want the benefits of 50mm of objective lens, you need to step up to a 30mm tube.

    • G

      Using the same lenses with a larger tube wouldn’t improve light transmission one bit. Tube diameter has nothing to do with light transmission.

      • Primarily the glass quality,grind etc determines that. Certainly more than tube diameter. Not saying it wouldn’t have any effect.

        • FourString

          Yeah, it’s Zeiss, I would assume that they know a thing or two about making glass…

      • Timo

        I agree with ‘G’ on this. Tube diameter has minimal if any impact on low light performance. Take Zeiss Classic Diatal 8×56 for example. 1″ tube and terrific low light performance.